A few recurring issues distinguish the editing of structured topics from that of other content. Here are the top 3 issues I’ve recently found while editing topics for language, consistency and structure.
1. Topic heading is weak
A heading can seem appropriate when you’re writing the topic, but it may still seem weak when you see it in the context of the entire help system, for example, in a list of search results.
Write topic headings so they give your readers a precise idea what that topic is about. Yes, that can be challenge when you’re trying to be precise and concise at the same time:
- Indicate what kind of information a topic contains. For task topics, consider starting the heading with an imperative verb. For concept topics, consider using noun phrases.
- Offer enough context so your reader can identify what area or functionality in the product the topic refers to.
2. Purpose or user benefit is missing
A topic can look great and complete: It does whatever self-contained thing it set out to explain. But if it doesn’t also contain a why and wherefore, it’s harder for the reader to understand whether they’ve come to the right topic and how it helps them.
Include the purpose or user benefit of whatever the topic describes early on, in the first or second paragraph. Answer the readers’ potential questions:
- Why is it important to know about or do whatever the topic describes?
- How does this connect to my work?
- How does it make my job or my life easier?
Be careful to describe the purpose or benefit of the topic’s content, for example, the actual concept or task, not the purpose of the topic. Focus on: “This function helps you…”, not “This topic tells you…”
3. Topic mixes topic types
A topic can look complete, comprehensive, and self-contained, but if it goes overboard and describes both, functional tasks and underlying concepts at length, it tends to overtax the patience of those who only need to know one of the two. It also makes it harder to assign a clear heading, to structure the topic clearly and to reuse the topic in additional contexts you might not yet know about.
Stick (mainly) to one topic type per topic. If you’re using the traditional triad of concept, task and reference topics, divide them accordingly, but keep it pragmatic. Ray Gallon and Mark Baker have both shown how a little conceptual information in task topics can go a long way, but they shouldn’t replace entire concept topics. Also see my previous post When topics don’t quite work from two years ago.
These top 3 issues and several others basically have the same underlying reason: We tend to write topics in the context of a function or a window, but that context is not necessarily familiar or identifiable to our readers.
Issues with the same reason also share the same basic solution: We should focus on writing topics in the context of our readers, their environment and their tasks in it.